On 29 June 2017 at 17:45, Stefan Weil <s...@weilnetz.de> wrote: > TCI was never meant to be used for production, so I think > my approach was acceptable.
I think perhaps this is at the root of some of the difference in perspective here -- I tend to the view that given that QEMU is a production codebase, we should not really have code in it which is neither (a) production-quality nor (b) intended to be incrementally improved until it reaches that level of usability; so anything that's in the middle ground should either be improved, or removed. I don't know whether I'm in a minority in that general view. You can make a similar argument regarding the obscure host OS/CPU either we support the platform well enough that you can actually use it and we're testing to ensure it remains the case, or we don't support it, and we should remove the code. (Ditto, various ancient board models...) thanks -- PMM